idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-15.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (August 23, 2018) is 2073 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4566 (Obsoleted by RFC 8866) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4960 (Obsoleted by RFC 9260) == Outdated reference: A later version (-19) exists of draft-ietf-clue-protocol-16 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Experimental draft: draft-ietf-clue-protocol (ref. 'I-D.ietf-clue-protocol') == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-clue-signaling-13 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Experimental draft: draft-ietf-clue-signaling (ref. 'I-D.ietf-clue-signaling') == Outdated reference: A later version (-28) exists of draft-ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg-20 Summary: 4 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 4 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 CLUE Working Group C. Holmberg 3 Internet-Draft Ericsson 4 Intended status: Standards Track August 23, 2018 5 Expires: February 24, 2019 7 CLUE Protocol data channel 8 draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-15 10 Abstract 12 This document defines how to use the WebRTC data channel mechanism in 13 order to realize a data channel, referred to as a CLUE data channel, 14 for transporting CLUE protocol messages between two CLUE entities. 16 The document defines how to describe the SCTPoDTLS association used 17 to realize the CLUE data channel using the Session Description 18 Protocol (SDP), and defines usage of SDP-based "SCTP over DTLS" data 19 channel negotiation mechanism for establishing a CLUE data channel. 21 Details and procedures associated with the CLUE protocol, and the SDP 22 Offer/Answer procedures for negotiating usage of a CLUE data channel, 23 are outside the scope of this document. 25 Status of This Memo 27 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 28 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 30 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 31 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 32 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 33 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 35 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 36 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 37 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 38 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 40 This Internet-Draft will expire on February 24, 2019. 42 Copyright Notice 44 Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 45 document authors. All rights reserved. 47 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 48 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 49 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 50 publication of this document. Please review these documents 51 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 52 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 53 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 54 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 55 described in the Simplified BSD License. 57 Table of Contents 59 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 60 2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 3. CLUE data channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 3.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 3.2. SCTP Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 3.2.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 3.2.2. SCTP Payload Protocol Identifier (PPID) . . . . . . . 4 66 3.2.3. Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 67 3.2.4. Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 68 3.2.5. Stream Reset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 69 3.2.6. SCTP Multihoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 70 3.2.7. Close CLUE data channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 71 3.3. SDP Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 72 3.3.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 73 3.3.2. SDP dcmap Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 74 3.3.3. SDP dcsa Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 75 3.3.4. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 76 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 77 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 78 5.1. New WebRTC data channel Protocol Value . . . . . . . . . 8 79 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 80 7. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 81 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 82 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 83 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 84 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 86 1. Introduction 88 This document defines how to use the WebRTC data channel mechanism 89 [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] in order to realize a data channel, 90 referred to as a CLUE data channel, for transporting CLUE protocol 91 [I-D.ietf-clue-protocol]messages between two CLUE entities. 93 The document defines how to describe the SCTPoDTLS association 94 [RFC8261] used to realize the CLUE data channel using the Session 95 Description Protocol (SDP) [RFC4566], and defines usage of the SDP- 96 based "SCTP over DTLS" data channel negotiation mechanism 98 [I-D.ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg]. This includes SCTP 99 considerations specific to a CLUE data channel, the SDP Media 100 Description (m- line) values, and usage of SDP attributes specific to 101 a CLUE data channel. 103 Details and procedures associated with the CLUE protocol, and the SDP 104 Offer/Answer [RFC3264] procedures for negotiating usage of a CLUE 105 data channel, are outside the scope of this document. 107 NOTE: The usage of the data channel Establishment Protocol (DCEP) 108 [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol] for establishing a CLUE data channel 109 is outside the scope of this document. 111 2. Conventions 113 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 114 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 115 document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119 116 [RFC2119]. 118 SCTPoDTLS association refers to an SCTP association carried over an 119 DTLS connection [RFC8261]. 121 WebRTC data channel refers to a pair of SCTP streams over a SCTPoDTLS 122 association that is used to transport non-media data between two 123 entities, as defined in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel]. 125 CLUE data channel refers to a WebRTC data channel 126 [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] realization, with a specific set of 127 SCTP characteristics, with the purpose of transporting CLUE protocol 128 [I-D.ietf-clue-protocol] messages between two CLUE entities. 130 CLUE entity refers to a SIP User Agent (UA) [RFC3261] that supports 131 the CLUE data channel and the CLUE protocol. 133 CLUE session refers to a SIP session [RFC3261] between two SIP UAs, 134 where a CLUE data channel, associated with the SIP session, has been 135 established between the SIP UAs. 137 SCTP stream is defined in [RFC4960] as a unidirectional logical 138 channel established from one to another associated SCTP endpoint, 139 within which all user messages are delivered in sequence except for 140 those submitted to the unordered delivery service. 142 SCTP identifier is defined in [RFC4960] as an unsigned integer, which 143 identifies an SCTP stream. 145 3. CLUE data channel 147 3.1. General 149 This section describes the realization of a CLUE data channel, using 150 the WebRTC data channel mechanism. This includes a set of SCTP 151 characteristics specific to a CLUE data channel, the values of the m- 152 line describing the SCTPoDTLS association associated with the WebRTC 153 data channel, and the usage of the SDP-based "SCTP over DTLS" data 154 channel negotiation mechanism for creating the CLUE data channel. 156 As described in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel], the SCTP streams 157 realizing a WebRTC data channel must be associated with the same SCTP 158 association. In addition, both SCTP streams realizing the WebRTC 159 data channel must use the same SCTP stream identifier value. These 160 rules also apply to a CLUE data channel. 162 Within a given CLUE session, a CLUE entity MUST use a single CLUE 163 data channel for transport of all CLUE messages towards its peer. 165 3.2. SCTP Considerations 167 3.2.1. General 169 As described in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel], different SCTP 170 options (e.g. regarding ordered delivery ), can be used for a data 171 channel. This section describes the SCTP options used for a CLUE 172 data channel. Section 3.3 describes how SCTP options are signalled 173 using SDP. 175 NOTE: While SCTP allows SCTP options to be applied per SCTP message, 176 [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] mandates that, for a given data 177 channel, the same SCTP options are applied to each SCTP message 178 associated with that data channel. 180 3.2.2. SCTP Payload Protocol Identifier (PPID) 182 A CLUE entity MUST use the PPID value 51 when sending a CLUE message 183 on a CLUE data channel. 185 NOTE: As described in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel], the PPID value 186 51 indicates that the SCTP message contains data encoded in a UTF-8 187 format. The PPID value 51 does not indicate what application 188 protocol the SCTP message is associated with, only the format in 189 which the data is encoded. 191 3.2.3. Reliability 193 The usage of SCTP for the CLUE data channel ensures reliable 194 transport of CLUE protocol [I-D.ietf-clue-protocol] messages. 196 A CLUE entity MUST NOT use the partial reliability or limited 197 retransmission SCTP extensions, described in [RFC3758], for the CLUE 198 data channel. 200 NOTE: [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] requires the support of the 201 partial reliability extension defined in [RFC3758]. This is not 202 needed for a CLUE data channel, as messages are required to always be 203 sent reliably. [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] also mandates support 204 of the limited retransmission policy defined in [RFC7496]. 206 3.2.4. Order 208 A CLUE entity MUST use the ordered delivery SCTP service, as 209 described in [RFC4960], for the CLUE data channel. 211 3.2.5. Stream Reset 213 A CLUE entity MUST support the stream reset extension defined in 214 [RFC6525]. 216 As defined in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel], the dynamic address 217 reconfiguration extension ('Supported Extensions Parameter' 218 parameter) defined in [RFC5061] must be used to signal the support of 219 the stream reset extension defined in [RFC6525]. Other features of 220 [RFC5061] MUST NOT be used for CLUE data channels. 222 3.2.6. SCTP Multihoming 224 SCTP multi-homing is not supported for SCTPoDTLS associations, and 225 can therefore not be used for a CLUE data channel. 227 3.2.7. Close CLUE data channel 229 As described in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol], in order to close a 230 data channel, an entity sends an SCTP reset message [RFC6525] on its 231 outgoing SCTP stream associated with the data channel. When the 232 remote peer receives the reset message, it also sends (unless already 233 sent) a reset message on its outgoing SCTP stream associated with the 234 data channel. The SCTPoDTLS association, and other data channels 235 established on the same association, are not affected by the SCTP 236 reset messages. 238 3.3. SDP Considerations 240 3.3.1. General 242 This section defines how to construct the SDP Media Description (m- 243 line) for describing the SCTPoDTLS association used to realize a CLUE 244 data channel. The section also defines how to use the SDP-based 245 "SCTP over DTLS" data channel negotiation mechanism 246 [I-D.ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg] for establishing a CLUE data 247 channel on the SCTPoDTLS association. 249 NOTE: Other protocols than SDP for negotiating usage of an SCTPoDTLS 250 association for realizing a CLUE data channel are outside the scope 251 of this specification. 253 [I-D.ietf-clue-signaling] describes the SDP Offer/Answer procedures 254 for negotiating a CLUE session, including the CLUE controlled media 255 streams and the CLUE data channel. 257 3.3.1.1. SDP Media Description Fields 259 As defined in [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp], the field values of an m- 260 line describing an SCTPoDTLS association are set as following: 262 +---------------+--------------+-----------------+------------------+ 263 | media | port | proto | fmt | 264 +---------------+--------------+-----------------+------------------+ 265 | "application" | UDP port | "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" | application | 266 | | value | | usage | 267 | "application" | TCP port | "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" | application | 268 | | value | | usage | 269 +---------------+--------------+-----------------+------------------+ 271 Table 1: SDP "proto" field values 273 CLUE entities SHOULD NOT transport the SCTPoDTLS association used to 274 realize the CLUE data channel over TCP (using the "TCP/DTLS/SCTP" 275 proto value), unless it is known that UDP/DTLS/SCTP will not work 276 (for instance, when the Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) 277 mechanism [RFC8445] is used and the ICE procedures determine that TCP 278 transport is required). 280 As defined in [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp], when the SCTPoDTLS 281 association is used to realize a WebRTC data channel, the value of 282 the application usage part is 'webrtc-datachannel'. 284 3.3.1.2. SDP sctp-port Attribute 286 As defined in [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp], the SDP sctp-port attribute 287 value is set to the SCTP port of the SCTPoDTLS association. A CLUE 288 entity can choose any valid SCTP port value. 290 3.3.2. SDP dcmap Attribute 292 The values of the SDP dcmap attribute 293 [I-D.ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg], associated with the m- line 294 describing the SCTPoDTLS association used to realize the WebRTC data 295 channel, are set as following: 297 +----------+------------+------------+--------+----------+----------+ 298 | stream- | subprotoco | label | ordere | max-retr | max-time | 299 | id | l | | d | | | 300 +----------+------------+------------+--------+----------+----------+ 301 | Value of | "CLUE" | Applicatio | "true" | N/A | N/A | 302 | the SCTP | | n specific | | | | 303 | stream | | | | | | 304 | used to | | | | | | 305 | realize | | | | | | 306 | the CLUE | | | | | | 307 | data | | | | | | 308 | channel | | | | | | 309 +----------+------------+------------+--------+----------+----------+ 311 Table 2: SDP dcmap attribute values 313 NOTE: As CLUE entities are required to use ordered SCTP message 314 delivery, with full reliability, according to the procedures in 315 [I-D.ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg] the max-retr and max-time 316 attribute parameters are not used when negotiating CLUE data 317 channels. 319 3.3.3. SDP dcsa Attribute 321 The SDP dcsa attribute [I-D.ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg] is not 322 used when establishing a CLUE data channel. 324 3.3.4. Example 325 m=application 54111 UDP/DTLS/SCTP webrtc-datachannel 326 a=sctp-port: 5000 327 a=dcmap:2 subprotocol="CLUE";ordered=true 329 Figure 1: SDP Media Description for a CLUE data channel 331 4. Security Considerations 333 This specification relies on the security properties of the WebRTC 334 data channel described in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel], including 335 reliance on DTLS. Since CLUE sessions are established using SIP/SDP, 336 protecting the data channel against message modification and recovery 337 requires the use of SIP authentication and authorization mechanisms 338 described in [RFC3261] for session establishment prior to 339 establishing the data channel. 341 5. IANA Considerations 343 5.1. New WebRTC data channel Protocol Value 345 [RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please replace RFC-XXXX with the RFC number of this 346 document.] 348 This document adds the 'CLUE' value to the "WebSocket Subprotocol 349 Name Registry" as follows: 351 Subprotocl Identifier: CLUE 352 Subprotocol Common Name: CLUE 353 Subprotocol Definition: RFC-XXXX 354 Reference: RFC-XXXX 356 6. Acknowledgments 358 Thanks to Paul Kyzivat, Christian Groves and Mark Duckworth for 359 comments on the document. 361 7. Change Log 363 [RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please remove this section when publishing] 365 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-14 367 o ICE reference update. 368 o Reference draft versions updates. 370 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-13 372 o Editorial changes based on Gen-ART review from Brian Carpenter. 374 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-12 376 o Changes based on AD comments from Alissa Cooper 377 (https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/clue/current/ 378 msg04911.html): 379 o - DCEP reference removed from security considerations. 380 o - Editorial fixes. 381 o - NOTE: Comment regarding the Security Considerations is still 382 pending. 384 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-11 386 o Changes based on WGLC comments from Juergen Stoetzer-Bradler and 387 Christian groves: 388 o - Reference updates. 389 o - 'Reference' added to IANA registration data. 391 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-10 393 o Security Considerations modified and enhanced, based on comments 394 provided by Alissa Cooper. 396 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-09 398 o Reference updates: 399 o - draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-prpolicies published as RFC 7496 400 o - Reference update of draft versions 402 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-08 404 o Changes based on WGLC comments from Daniel Burnett: 405 o - Editorial corrections. 406 o Changes based on WGLC comments from Paul Kyzivat: 407 o - Editorial corrections. 409 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-07 411 o Changes based on WGLC comments from Christian Groves: 412 o - IANA considerations for dcmap attribute removed. 413 o - Explicit clarification that the dcmap attribute max-time and 414 max-retr parameters are not used with ordered/reliable 415 transmission of SCTP messages. 416 o - Indication that TCP transport should only be used if ICE is 417 used, and if usage of TCP is required by ICE. 419 o - Informative reference to ICE added. 420 o - Editorial corrections. 421 o Changes based on WGLC comments from Mark Duckworth: 422 o - Make it more clear that the rules regarding usage of partial 423 reliability and ordered reliability apply to CLUE data channels. 424 o Changes based on WGLC comments from Paul Kyzivat: 425 o - Clarify that same SCTP options are applied to each SCTP message 426 associated with a given data channel. 427 o - Switched location of sections 3.2 and 3.3. 428 o - PPID table removed. Not needed, since only one value is used. 429 o - Editorial corrections. 431 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-06 433 o Usage of DCEP removed. 435 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-05 437 o "DTLS/SCTP" split into "UDP/DTLS/SCTP" and "TCP/DTLS/SCTP". 438 o Removed note regarding optionality of including the SDP sctp-port 439 attribute. 440 o Added defintion of 'SCTPoDTLS association' to the Conventions. 441 o Reference to RFC 4566 (SDP) added. 443 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-04 445 o Defines DCEP and external SDP negotiation as two separate 446 mechanisms for negotiating a CLUE data channel. 447 o Updates based on technical changes in referenced specifications. 448 o Reference to draft-ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp added. 450 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-03 452 o IANA considerations added. 453 o Editorial changes based on comments from Christian Groves. 455 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-02 457 o SDP m- line example fixed. 458 o OPEN ISSUE #1 closed. 459 o - It was agreed (IETF#91) to use draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel- 460 sdpneg, as it was adopted as a WG item in MMUSIC. 461 o - Details for draft-ejzak-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg usage added. 462 o SDP Offer/Answer procedures removed, as they will be defined in 463 the CLUE protocol draft. 464 o References updated. 466 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-01 467 o Support of interleaving "MUST"->"SHOULD". 468 o Example updated. 469 o Reference update. 471 Changes from draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-00 473 o SDP Offer/Answer procedures structures according to RFC 3264. 474 o Reference update. 476 Changes from draft-holmberg-clue-datachannel-04 478 o Draft submitted as draft-ietf-clue-data-channel-00. 479 o Editorial nits fixed. 480 o Changes based on comments from Paul Kyzivat (http://www.ietf.org/ 481 mail-archive/web/clue/current/msg03559.html). 482 o - Proto value fixed. 483 o - Explicit text that the partial reliability and limited 484 retransmission policies MUST NOT be used. 485 o - Added open issue on whether the DCEP 'protocol' field value for 486 CLUE should contain a version number. 487 o - Removed paragraph saying that an offerer must not insert more 488 than one m- line describing an SCTPoDTLS association to be used to 489 realize a CLUE data channel, as the draft already states that only 490 one CLUE data channel per CLUE session shall be opened. 491 o - Added reference to draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol regarding 492 details on reseting SCTP streams. 493 o - Added text saying that the value of the DCEP 'channel type' MUST 494 be DATA_CHANNEL_RELIABLE. 495 o - Clarified that DCEP must be supported, and used in the absence 496 of another mechanism for opening a CLUE data channel. 498 Changes from draft-holmberg-clue-datachannel-03 500 o Procedures updated, based on WG agreement (IETF#89) to use DCEP 501 for the CLUE data channel. 502 o Procedures updated, based on WG agreement (IETF#89) that offerer 503 is responsible for sending DCEP DATA_CHANNEL_OPEN. 504 o Editorial changes, and alignments caused by changes in referenced 505 specifications. 507 Changes from draft-holmberg-clue-datachannel-02 509 o PPID value for CLUE messages added 510 o References updated 512 Changes from draft-holmberg-clue-datachannel-01 514 o More text added 515 Changes from draft-holmberg-clue-datachannel-00 517 o Editorial corrections based on comments from Paul K 519 8. References 521 8.1. Normative References 523 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 524 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 525 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 526 . 528 [RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, 529 A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. 530 Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, 531 DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002, 532 . 534 [RFC3264] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model 535 with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, 536 DOI 10.17487/RFC3264, June 2002, 537 . 539 [RFC4566] Handley, M., Jacobson, V., and C. Perkins, "SDP: Session 540 Description Protocol", RFC 4566, DOI 10.17487/RFC4566, 541 July 2006, . 543 [RFC4960] Stewart, R., Ed., "Stream Control Transmission Protocol", 544 RFC 4960, DOI 10.17487/RFC4960, September 2007, 545 . 547 [RFC5061] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., Maruyama, S., and M. 548 Kozuka, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) 549 Dynamic Address Reconfiguration", RFC 5061, 550 DOI 10.17487/RFC5061, September 2007, 551 . 553 [RFC6525] Stewart, R., Tuexen, M., and P. Lei, "Stream Control 554 Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Stream Reconfiguration", 555 RFC 6525, DOI 10.17487/RFC6525, February 2012, 556 . 558 [RFC7496] Tuexen, M., Seggelmann, R., Stewart, R., and S. Loreto, 559 "Additional Policies for the Partially Reliable Stream 560 Control Transmission Protocol Extension", RFC 7496, 561 DOI 10.17487/RFC7496, April 2015, 562 . 564 [RFC8261] Tuexen, M., Stewart, R., Jesup, R., and S. Loreto, 565 "Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Encapsulation of 566 SCTP Packets", RFC 8261, DOI 10.17487/RFC8261, November 567 2017, . 569 [I-D.ietf-clue-protocol] 570 Presta, R. and S. Romano, "CLUE protocol", draft-ietf- 571 clue-protocol-16.txt (work in progress), August 2018. 573 [I-D.ietf-clue-signaling] 574 Kyzivat, P., Xiao, L., Groves, C., and S. Romano, "CLUE 575 Signaling", draft-ietf-clue-signaling-13.txt (work in 576 progress), November 2017. 578 [I-D.ietf-mmusic-sctp-sdp] 579 Holmberg, C., Loreto, S., and G. Camarillo, "Stream 580 Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)-Based Media Transport 581 in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", draft-ietf- 582 mmusic-sctp-sdp-26.txt (work in progress), April 2017. 584 [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] 585 Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tuexen, "WebRTC data 586 channels", draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-13.txt (work in 587 progress), January 2015. 589 [I-D.ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg] 590 Drage, K., Makaraju, R., Stoetzer-Bradler, J., Ejzak, R., 591 and J. Marcon, "SDP-based "SCTP over DTLS" data channel 592 negotiation", draft-ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg-20.txt 593 (work in progress), June 2018. 595 8.2. Informative References 597 [RFC3758] Stewart, R., Ramalho, M., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., and P. 598 Conrad, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) 599 Partial Reliability Extension", RFC 3758, 600 DOI 10.17487/RFC3758, May 2004, 601 . 603 [RFC8445] Keranen, A., Holmberg, C., and J. Rosenberg, "Interactive 604 Connectivity Establishment (ICE): A Protocol for Network 605 Address Translator (NAT) Traversal", RFC 8445, 606 DOI 10.17487/RFC8445, July 2018, 607 . 609 [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol] 610 Jesup, R., Loreto, S., and M. Tuexen, "WebRTC data channel 611 Establishment Protocol", draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol- 612 09.txt (work in progress), January 2015. 614 Author's Address 616 Christer Holmberg 617 Ericsson 618 Hirsalantie 11 619 Jorvas 02420 620 Finland 622 Email: christer.holmberg@ericsson.com